Linwood F. Eddleton, Jr., a Virginia state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 ("§ 2254 Petition") challenging his convictions in the Circuit Court of the County of Henrico, Virginia ("Circuit Court"). Respondent moves to dismiss, inter alia, on the ground that the one-year statute of limitations governing federal habeas petitions bars the § 2254 Petition. Despite sending appropriate Roseboro[2] notice with the Motion to Dismiss, Eddleton has not responded. The matter is ripe for disposition.

I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY

After a bench trial, the Circuit Court found Eddleton guilty of grand larceny, statutory burglary, and possession of a firearm by a violent convicted felon. On August 7, 2006, the Circuit Court entered final judgment with respect to the above convictions and sentenced Eddleton to an active sentence of nine years in prison. Commonwealth v. Eddleton, Nos. CR06-146 through -148, at 1-2 (Va. Cir. Ct. Aug. 7, 2006). Eddleton appealed his convictions. On September 10, 2007, the Supreme Court of Virginia refused Eddleton's petition for appeal. Eddleton v. Commonwealth, No. 070395, at 1 (Va. Sept. 10, 2007).

On September 9, 2008, Eddleton filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus with the Supreme Court of Virginia. Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus at 1, Eddleton v. Dir. of the Dep't of Corr., No. 081880 (Va. filed Sept. 9, 2008). On March 19, 2009, the Supreme Court of Virginia denied the petition on the merits. Eddleton v. Dir. of the Dep't of Corr., No. 081880, at 1-3 (Va. Mar. 19, 2009).

On December 5, 2013, Eddleton filed the instant § 2254 Petition with this Court.[4] In his § 2254 Petition, Eddleton asserts:

Claim One "Petitioner was denied the due process of law when the prosecution (1) failed to disclose and did suppress impeachment evidence and (2) knowingly used perjured testimony..." (§ 2254 Pet. 5.)[5]

Claim Three Trial counsel "failed to consult with petitioner regarding trial strategy, failed to discuss with petitioner any plea option, and failed to purse any plea negotiations...." ( Id. at 8.)

Claim Four "Petitioner was denied due process because the prosecution knowingly suppressed impeachment evidence... and knowingly used perjured testimony...." ( Id. at 9.)

II. ANALYSIS

A. Statute of Limitations

Respondent contends that the federal statute of limitations bars Eddleton's claims. Section 101 of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act ("AEDPA") amended 28 U.S.C. § 2244 to establish a one-year period of limitation for the filing of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus by a person in custody ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.